C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
>>> Ouch. Of course, should have thought of that. Maybe we
>> need a patch penguin?
>>> CVS actually handles 'vendor branches' fairly nicely. It should be
> possible for Jakob (or whoever else decides to be the 'test penguin')
> to maintain his own 'testing' CVS tree, with rapid development, etc,
> and periodically resync his own tree to canonical Wine CVS (using the
> vendor branch functionality) and then create large-ish 'tests-only'
> chunks from that to throw at Alexandre "once in a while".
>> There really shouldn't be much reason for Alexandre to reject patches
> that touch tests only; after all, if the tests pass on windows, they
> should pass on wine, no matter how evil they look. (Well, within
> reason.)
>> That's MHO, at least. If I understand correctly, the primary reason
> for the 'testing' CVS is just to manage distribution of proposed tests
> to a server farm of test-runners; which is slightly different from the
> purpose of the mainline CVS tree. [Also -- a decoupled 'testing' CVS
> like I describe above can be implemented by the motivated folks w/o
> Alexandre's involvement at all, which permits judgements to be
> postponed until we've got some evidence of usefulness.]
Yes. And I think I can implement most of even the more elaborate schemes
without initially
disturbing Alexandre or anyone else. As you say, until we get more
evidence of usefulness.
> In this vein -- where *is* the current testing infrastructre located?
> I'm pretty new to Wine, and I couldn't find any links from winehq.
> [These should probably be added, or made more visible if they do exist,
> especially if the goal is to encourage test submission with patch
> submission.]
http://test.winehq.org/data/
regards,
Jakob